Massachusetts School and District Profiles

Undermountain
Districts Schools
Select an Org
View Previous Year
2016
View Next Year
print page

2016 Accountability Data - Undermountain
Organization Information
District:Southern Berkshire (07650000)School type:Elementary School
School:Undermountain (07650035)Grades served:PK,K,01,02,03,04,05,06
Region:Berkshires +Title I status:Title I School (TA)
Accountability and Assistance Level:Level 3
 Summary > 2016
2016 English Language Arts Proficiency Gap Narrowing
  0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Baseline CPI 2015 CPI 2016 CPI CPI Change 2016 Target 6 Year Goal CPI Percentile in School Type N PPI Points Rating
All studentsCPI = 87, Target = 92.4CPI = 87, Target = 92.4CPI = 87, Target = 92.4 87.0 85.1 87.0 1.9 92.4 93.5 5718850Improved Below Target
High needsCPI = 76.9, Target = 87.8CPI = 76.9, Target = 87.8CPI = 76.9, Target = 87.8 79.1 73.6 76.9 3.3 87.8 89.6 557950Improved Below Target
Econ. DisadvantagedCPI = 82.1, Target = 77.8CPI = 82.1, Target = 77.8CPI = 82.1, Target = 77.8 75.8 75.8 82.1 6.3 77.8 87.9 7560100Above Target
EL and Former EL -------2--
Students w/ disabilitiesCPI = 60.2, Target = 83.3CPI = 60.2, Target = 83.3CPI = 60.2, Target = 83.3 71.3 60.3 60.2 -0.1 83.3 85.7 373225No Change
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat. -------1--
Asian ----------
Afr. Amer./Black -------2--
Hispanic/Latino -------6--
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat. -------10--
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl. ----------
WhiteCPI = 86.7, Target = 92.5CPI = 86.7, Target = 92.5CPI = 86.7, Target = 92.5 87.1 84.4 86.7 2.3 92.5 93.6 4216950Improved Below Target
Summary > 2016
2016 Mathematics Proficiency Gap Narrowing
  0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Baseline CPI 2015 CPI 2016 CPI CPI Change 2016 Target 6 Year Goal CPI Percentile in School Type N PPI Points Rating
All studentsCPI = 84.2, Target = 86.5CPI = 84.2, Target = 86.5CPI = 84.2, Target = 86.5 76.8 77.3 84.2 6.9 86.5 88.4 4518750Improved Below Target
High needsCPI = 74.4, Target = 81.4CPI = 74.4, Target = 81.4CPI = 74.4, Target = 81.4 68.1 65.8 74.4 8.6 81.4 84.1 447750Improved Below Target
Econ. DisadvantagedCPI = 75.8, Target = 71.1CPI = 75.8, Target = 71.1CPI = 75.8, Target = 71.1 68.5 68.5 75.8 7.3 71.1 84.3 4759100Above Target
EL and Former EL -------2--
Students w/ disabilitiesCPI = 69.4, Target = 77.7CPI = 69.4, Target = 77.7CPI = 69.4, Target = 77.7 61.8 57.4 69.4 12.0 77.7 80.9 643150Improved Below Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat. ----------
Asian ----------
Afr. Amer./Black -------2--
Hispanic/Latino -------6--
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat. -------10--
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl. ----------
WhiteCPI = 84.3, Target = 86.8CPI = 84.3, Target = 86.8CPI = 84.3, Target = 86.8 77.3 77.5 84.3 6.8 86.8 88.7 3016950Improved Below Target
Summary > 2016
2016 Science Proficiency Gap Narrowing
  0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Baseline CPI 2015 CPI 2016 CPI CPI Change 2016 Target 6 Year Goal CPI Percentile in School Type N PPI Points Rating
All studentsCPI = 81.4, Target = 91.3CPI = 81.4, Target = 91.3CPI = 81.4, Target = 91.3 85.0 88.0 81.4 -6.6 91.3 92.5 51550Declined
High needs  76.0---- 88.0-23--
Econ. Disadvantaged -------18--
EL and Former EL ----------
Students w/ disabilities -------8--
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat. ----------
Asian ----------
Afr. Amer./Black -------1--
Hispanic/Latino -------2--
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat. -------2--
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl. ----------
WhiteCPI = 81, Target = 92.2CPI = 81, Target = 92.2CPI = 81, Target = 92.2 86.6 87.2 81.0 -6.2 92.2 93.3 31500Declined
Summary > 2016
2016 English Language Arts Extra Credit
  Extra credit for increasing % Advanced (10% or more) Extra credit for decreasing % Warning/Failing (10% or more)
2015
% Advanced		 2016
% Advanced		 N PPI Points 2015
% Warning/Failing		 2016
% Warning/Failing		 N PPI Points
All students 9.6 16.518825 9.6 5.918825
High needs 3.4 5.17925 19.5 12.77925
Econ. Disadvantaged 4.6 6.76025 18.5 6.76025
EL and Former EL--2---2-
Students w/ disabilities 0.0 0.0320 35.3 31.33225
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.--1---1-
Asian--------
Afr. Amer./Black--2---2-
Hispanic/Latino--6---6-
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.--10---10-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.--------
White 9.3 16.616925 10.5 6.516925
Summary > 2016
2016 Mathematics Extra Credit
  Extra credit for increasing % Advanced (10% or more) Extra credit for decreasing % Warning/Failing (10% or more)
2015
% Advanced		 2016
% Advanced		 N PPI Points 2015
% Warning/Failing		 2016
% Warning/Failing		 N PPI Points
All students 16.0 31.018725 11.2 9.618725
High needs 3.4 18.27725 20.7 16.97725
Econ. Disadvantaged 4.6 20.35925 16.9 15.3590
EL and Former EL--2---2-
Students w/ disabilities 0.0 9.73125 29.4 22.63125
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.--------
Asian--------
Afr. Amer./Black--2---2-
Hispanic/Latino--6---6-
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.--10---10-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.--------
White 15.7 30.216925 11.6 8.916925
Summary > 2016
2016 Science Extra Credit
  Extra credit for increasing % Advanced (10% or more) Extra credit for decreasing % Warning/Failing (10% or more)
2015
% Advanced		 2016
% Advanced		 N PPI Points 2015
% Warning/Failing		 2016
% Warning/Failing		 N PPI Points
All students 23.1 18.2550 5.8 7.3550
High needs--23---23-
Econ. Disadvantaged--18---18-
EL and Former EL--------
Students w/ disabilities--8---8-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.--------
Asian--------
Afr. Amer./Black--1---1-
Hispanic/Latino--2---2-
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.--2---2-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.--------
White 22.4 20.0500 6.1 8.0500
Summary > 2016
2016 English Language Arts Growth
  0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 2015 SGP 2016 SGP SGP Change 6 Year Goal Met Safe Harbor? N PPI Points Rating
All studentsSGP = 56, Target = 51SGP = 56, Target = 51SGP = 56, Target = 51 47.0 56.0 9.0 51.0No13575On Target
High needsSGP = 47, Target = 51SGP = 47, Target = 51SGP = 47, Target = 51 29.0 47.0 18.0 51.0No61100Above Target
Econ. DisadvantagedSGP = 68.5, Target = 51SGP = 68.5, Target = 51SGP = 68.5, Target = 51 27.5 68.5 41.0 51.0No46100Above Target
EL and Former EL --- 51.0----
Students w/ disabilities --- 51.0-24--
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat. --- 51.0-1--
Asian --- 51.0----
Afr. Amer./Black --- 51.0-1--
Hispanic/Latino --- 51.0-4--
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat. --- 51.0-4--
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl. --- 51.0----
WhiteSGP = 56, Target = 51SGP = 56, Target = 51SGP = 56, Target = 51 47.0 56.0 9.0 51.0No12575On Target
Summary > 2016
2016 Mathematics Growth
  0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 2015 SGP 2016 SGP SGP Change 6 Year Goal Met Safe Harbor? N PPI Points Rating
All studentsSGP = 63, Target = 51SGP = 63, Target = 51SGP = 63, Target = 51 55.0 63.0 8.0 51.0Yes133100Above Target
High needsSGP = 63, Target = 51SGP = 63, Target = 51SGP = 63, Target = 51 50.0 63.0 13.0 51.0Yes59100Above Target
Econ. DisadvantagedSGP = 64, Target = 51SGP = 64, Target = 51SGP = 64, Target = 51 52.0 64.0 12.0 51.0Yes45100Above Target
EL and Former EL --- 51.0----
Students w/ disabilitiesSGP = 56, Target = 51SGP = 56, Target = 51SGP = 56, Target = 51 33.0 56.0 23.0 51.0Yes23100Above Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat. --- 51.0-0--
Asian --- 51.0----
Afr. Amer./Black --- 51.0-1--
Hispanic/Latino --- 51.0-4--
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat. --- 51.0-4--
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl. --- 51.0----
WhiteSGP = 62.5, Target = 51SGP = 62.5, Target = 51SGP = 62.5, Target = 51 54.5 62.5 8.0 51.0Yes124100Above Target
Summary > 2016
2016 Extra credit for English language proficiency growth
  2016 SGPA 2016 Target SGPA N Included PPI Points
All students- 60.05-
High needs- 60.05-
EL and Former EL- 60.05-
Summary > 2016
2016 Assessment Participation
  English Language Arts Mathematics Science
Enrolled Assessed % Met Target (95%) Enrolled Assessed % Met Target (95%) Enrolled Assessed % Met Target (95%)
All students20619096Yes20618996Yes625795Yes
High needs867996Yes867795Yes262388No
Econ. Disadvantaged656096Yes655996Yes21---
EL and Former EL2---2-------
Students w/ disabilities383292No383191No11---
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.2---2---1---
Asian------------
Afr. Amer./Black2---2---1---
Hispanic/Latino6---6---2---
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.11---11---3---
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.------------
White18517196Yes18517196Yes555295Yes

NOTE: In 2016, assessment participation was calculated two ways: First, the 2016 participation rate for each subgroup in each subject area test was calculated. If the actual 2016 participation rate was lower than 95 percent for any group in any subject, that rate was compared to the average of the most recent two years of assessment participation data for that group and subject. The higher of the two resulting rates was factored into the assignment of the school or district's 2016 accountability and assistance level.

School and District Profiles